Will an additional observer enhance adenoma detection during colonoscopy (original) (raw)
Related papers
A simple method to improve adenoma detection rate during colonoscopy: altering patient position
Canadian journal of gastroenterology = Journal canadien de gastroenterologie, 2013
Colonoscopy is currently considered to be the gold standard method for detecting and removing adenomatous polyps. However, tandem colonoscopy studies reveal a pooled polyp miss rate of 22%. A prospective randomized trial was conducted to assess whether alteration of patient position during colonoscopy withdrawal increases the adenoma detection rate (ADR). The study group included 120 patients who presented for elective colonoscopic examination. After reaching the cecum, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to examination in either the left lateral position or other positions (left lateral position for the cecum, ascending colon and hepatic flexure; supine for transverse colon; and supine and right lateral position for splenic flexure, descending and sigmoid colon) first. Examination of the colon was performed segment by segment. The size, morphology and location of all polyps were recorded. Polyps were removed immediately after examination of a colon segment when all posit...
Significance of a normal surveillance colonoscopy in patients with a history of adenomatous polyps
Diseases of The Colon & Rectum, 2000
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the appropriate surveillance for patients with a history of adenomatous polyps whose last colonoscopic examination was normal. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of a database of 7,677 colonoscopies (1990 to 1996). In patients under colonoscopic surveillance, we reviewed cases of patients who had received three colonoscopies (an index (initial) colonoscopy positive for adenomas and 2 follow-up colonoscopies (interim and final)). The risk of adenomas and cancers at final follow-up colonoscopy was compared between patients having a normal interim colonoscopy and those with a positive interim colonoscopy. The risk at final colonoscopy was also stratified by time interval and the size and number of adenomas at the initial index colonoscopy. RESULTS: Two hundred four patients undergoing surveillance for adenomas met inclusion criteria. At index colonoscopy the median polyp size was 1 cm and median frequency was three polyps. At all follow-up colonoscopies, we detected 493 adenomas and one cancer (median follow-up, 55 months). At 36 months patients with a normal interim colonoscopy (n=91) had significantly fewer polyps than patients with a positive interim colonoscopy (n=113; 15vs. 40 percent;P=0.0001). By 40 months, adenomas were detected in more than 40 percent of patients in both groups. The risk after a normal interim colonoscopy was not affected by time interval or number or size of polyps. Adenomas found subsequent to a normal interim colonoscopy were dispersed throughout the colon in 28 patients and isolated to the rectosigmoid in 6 patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a history of adenomas, a normal follow-up colonoscopy is associated with a statistically but not clinically significant reduction in the risk of subsequent colonic neoplasms. These patients require follow-up surveillance colonoscopy at a four-year to five-year interval.
Adenoma and Polyp Detection Rates in Colonoscopy according to Indication
Gastroenterology research and practice, 2017
Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is a validated quality measure for screening colonoscopy, but there are little data for other indications. The distribution of adenomas is not well described for these indications. To describe ADR and the adenoma distribution in the proximal and distal colon based on colonoscopy indication. Outpatient colonoscopies are subdivided by indication. PDR and ADR for the entire colon and for proximal and distal colon. Data were compared using generalized estimating equations to adjust for clustering amongst endoscopists while controlling for patient age and gender. 3436 colonoscopies were reviewed (51.2%: men (= 1759)). Indications are screening 49.2%, surveillance 29.3%, change in bowel habit 8.4%, bleeding 5.8%, colitides 3.0%, pain 2.8%, and miscellaneous 1.5%. Overall ADR was 37% proximal ADR 28%, and distal ADR 17%. PDR and ADR were significantly higher in surveillance than in screening (PDR: 69% versus 51%; ADR: 50% versus 33%;= 0.0001). Adenomas were mor...
Endoscopy International Open, 2020
Background and study aims Adenomas per colonoscopy (APC) and adenomas per positive patient (APP) have been proposed as additional quality indicators but their association with adenoma detection rate (ADR) is not well studied. The aim of our study was to evaluate the variability in APC and APP, their association with ADR, and associated risk factors in screening colonoscopies from a community practice. Patients and methods We calculated the APC, APP, and ADR from all screening colonoscopies performed over 5 years. We used adjusted hierarchical logistic regression to assess the association of factors with APC, APP, and ADR. Results There were 80,915 screening colonoscopies by 60 gastroenterologists. The median (Q1-Q3) APC, APP, and ADR were 0.41 (0.36 – 0.53), 1.33 (1.23 – 1.40), and 0.32 (0.28 – 0.38), respectively. Despite the high correlation between APC and ADR, 47.6 % of endoscopists with the lowest APC had a higher ADR, and no endoscopists with the highest APC had a lower ADR. O...
BMJ Open Gastroenterology, 2019
BackgroundColonoscopy is a commonly used modality for screening and surveillance of colorectal cancer (CRC). Therefore, it is essential to have adequate bowel preparation (prep) for the procedure which depends on type of bowel regimens, diet before colonoscopy and timing of the procedure.AimsThe purpose of this study is to analyse the effect of multiple factors on adenoma detection rate (ADR) and prep quality of colonoscopy. This is the also the first study determining outcomes based on various combinations of diet, timing of the procedure and bowel prep regimens.MethodsThis is a retrospective single-centre observational study. Data about diet before procedure, bowel prepprep regimen and timing of the procedure was collected for patients coming for screening colonoscopy.ResultsPatients with split prep had higher good prep rates (73.8% vs 56.2%) and higher ADRs (34.2 % vs 29.9%) as compared with non-split prep. The good prep quality (65.8% vs 62.1%) and ADRs (31.9% vs 31.5%) were com...